River shots - yes, with blurred water time exposure.

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Alan Browne, Aug 12, 2012.

  1. Alan Browne

    Alan Browne Guest

    As chance had it we went for a walk up a small river yesterday
    afternoon. Not much to photograph and I didn't have an ND with me. I
    did have my polarizer. So set the ISO as low as possible (100) and
    slapped on the pol (which given the overcast allowed control of the
    clouds reflecting in the water that an ND would not provide).

    The first two:

    To me the second is more appealing. Not something I'd print however.

    Then there was this -


    But there was no good vantage point to capture the "S" bend well.

    But other things that can be done with water is to look for currents
    bearing blobs of foam and making streak patterns. This river wasn't
    ideal (too much foam everywhere), but there were a couple nice pools.






    Too much happening to make those really nice, but you get an idea for
    the effect. And the polarizer was essential to get rid of the clouds
    reflecting in the water.

    But in the end I can't help but feel that photographing moving water can
    benefit from 'frozen', to slight movement to veils. In the end it's
    impact of the image that count, not "what" or "how" it is done and not
    whether some people deem it over done or too cliché.

    Also had the most painful ever bite from a horsefly. Pain didn't
    subside until this morning.
    Alan Browne, Aug 12, 2012
    1. Advertisements

  2. Alan Browne

    RichA Guest

    Demon: "Hmmm, intriguing...no, wait; BORING! Tear off his

    -Buffy the Vampire Slayer
    RichA, Aug 12, 2012
    1. Advertisements

  3. Alan Browne

    Alan Browne Guest

    C'mon Rich - post a photograph instead. Blaze the trail for us.
    Alan Browne, Aug 12, 2012
  4. Alan Browne

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Demon: "Hmmm, intriguing...no, wait; BORING! Tear off his

    -Buffy the Vampire Slayer

    If blurred water is too cliché, what about all those close-ups with blurred
    backgrounds? If you want to make an argument for overdone, that would be

    Or, then there's the portrait with the hint of a shadow extending up, but
    not touching, the eye. Millions shot every year.

    Or, there's the ever-popular landscape with subject highlighted by shaft of
    light. Ask any landscape photographer worth his or her salt if their
    portfolio would be complete without such a shot, and I'm pretty confident I
    know what they'll say.

    The reason these "clichéic" shots are so prevalent is that they sell. So,
    like it or not, if you view the work of others, lighten up a bit and try to
    enjoy what you see.

    Take Care,
    Dudley Hanks, Aug 12, 2012
  5. Alan Browne

    PeterN Guest

    Music by Beethoven and Tchaikovsky can also be cliche, but millions of
    people listen and enjoy it every year.
    I guess some here are abot that.
    PeterN, Aug 12, 2012
  6. Alan Browne

    BobF Guest

    I think moving water should be blurred to some extent, lets you know it's

    I found your foam pictures kind of dizzying!
    BobF, Aug 13, 2012
  7. Alan Browne

    Alan Browne Guest

    They are a bit odd aren't they? Like they're vibrating.

    Not what I was looking for. I wanted just a few blobs. But that river
    was quite fast (in most places) and was making a lot of foam.
    Alan Browne, Aug 13, 2012
  8. Alan Browne

    % Guest

    did you fanboi
    %, Aug 16, 2012
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.